Ariel Schlesinger
Taking this lecture more like therapy than to preach to us about his work, Schlesinger wanted to show how others captivate his work through critiques and social media posts of his works. "Two Good Reasons" The installation piece above that seamlessly spins in symmetry with the other two create a force that pushes them upwards and back to the floor on every spin. This to me was so effortless, but the mechanics and precision behind it were very difficult, and took many experiments to master. He went on to explain how paper for him was the initial material that he would use to manipulate, change, fold and form ideas with. This is a huge connection to my own work as I use paper for the same properties due to its many uses and it being a common everyday object. It is impressive that even leaving the blank on display can be so mesmerising to watch this has given me the idea to experiment more with leaving it as a blank canvas or piece of paper that can support itself just through its shape and structure. However, in some aspects like my waterfall at st.Georges it was needed to be painted for the emphasis of scale and shadows in the piece. I like the space that was given around the piece because it allowed the audience to see all sides and different perspectives of the installation and performance element of it. Most of his work is based on kinetic movement because this series comes naturally easy for him.
Choosing sculpture ect provides him with more of a challenge. An inspiration for him was Charlie Chaplin's films as they created humour without the use of speaking. One where he smashes a window in slapstick comedy was recreated by Schlesinger through smashing gallery windows and then framing an image of said window with the broken glass from the original widow. This shows layers of meaning and a good link to his inspiration which is what I am for myself as the influences I choose are what I want my work to resemble but not be obvious or copping it either. He wanted it to focus on the glass crack rather than the view behind it. I like the idea behind the piece but I'd prefer to see the view unblurred as it may look manipulated or changed through the broken glass, compared to the original state. Another series of his works that is inspired also by narrative is the method of carefully burning Persian rugs into patterns. This was influenced from the same sort of rugs that were kept safe from damage in the world war in bunkers that managed to preserve these great pieces of historical and cultural art. However one bunker was hit, setting fire to these priceless rugs that took many days of hard labour to complete. The state the were later recovered in showed an odd pattern of burning in the carpets that contrasted with the original textured pattern. This inspired Schlesinger to recreate this accident through carefully burning holes and patterns into similar second hand carpets. This shows how his influences play a big part on the method of his practise because it shows the narrative in his pieces. However, sometimes with too many ideas the pieces can become overworked. For example he explained that he was going to dip the edges in gold or start adding painted layers. This would have ruined the simplicity of the piece. I feel this too as sometimes I feel that I have to add extra elements to a piece if it comes across abstract or minimalist because detail is important to me in my art. However, stepping back and receiving feedback on the work helps to realise that sometimes it can be ruined and to maybe use those ideas on a completely new piece.
He then use this method by burning patterns into rolls of canvas' and then layering the pieces all on one to resemble the Persian rugs that became wanted. However, I feel that these lost the authentic and historic appeal of the rugs and it was trying to appeal too much to a commercial market. This is a worry for me that by selling work or relying on commissions as an income will change my style and practise to conform to the buyers which in the case did for Schlesinger's pieces. I feel that his work overall is very impressive and links well to my own. For his pieces are narrative based but maybe not as design based as my own. They show more of a factual and informative message than the theatrical type i am aiming for. however out of this lecture I did some research into other pieces he has done and there is one where he uses a real human skull and turns it inside out through breaking it into small pieces and forming it again just in reverse. This baffles me as a piece of art, but brought to my attention why is my work on skulls anymore artistic? Id say mine are more installation and prop based where as his are showing the possibilities and queries that people have without knowing until they see his mesmerising pieces.
Taking this lecture more like therapy than to preach to us about his work, Schlesinger wanted to show how others captivate his work through critiques and social media posts of his works. "Two Good Reasons" The installation piece above that seamlessly spins in symmetry with the other two create a force that pushes them upwards and back to the floor on every spin. This to me was so effortless, but the mechanics and precision behind it were very difficult, and took many experiments to master. He went on to explain how paper for him was the initial material that he would use to manipulate, change, fold and form ideas with. This is a huge connection to my own work as I use paper for the same properties due to its many uses and it being a common everyday object. It is impressive that even leaving the blank on display can be so mesmerising to watch this has given me the idea to experiment more with leaving it as a blank canvas or piece of paper that can support itself just through its shape and structure. However, in some aspects like my waterfall at st.Georges it was needed to be painted for the emphasis of scale and shadows in the piece. I like the space that was given around the piece because it allowed the audience to see all sides and different perspectives of the installation and performance element of it. Most of his work is based on kinetic movement because this series comes naturally easy for him.
Choosing sculpture ect provides him with more of a challenge. An inspiration for him was Charlie Chaplin's films as they created humour without the use of speaking. One where he smashes a window in slapstick comedy was recreated by Schlesinger through smashing gallery windows and then framing an image of said window with the broken glass from the original widow. This shows layers of meaning and a good link to his inspiration which is what I am for myself as the influences I choose are what I want my work to resemble but not be obvious or copping it either. He wanted it to focus on the glass crack rather than the view behind it. I like the idea behind the piece but I'd prefer to see the view unblurred as it may look manipulated or changed through the broken glass, compared to the original state. Another series of his works that is inspired also by narrative is the method of carefully burning Persian rugs into patterns. This was influenced from the same sort of rugs that were kept safe from damage in the world war in bunkers that managed to preserve these great pieces of historical and cultural art. However one bunker was hit, setting fire to these priceless rugs that took many days of hard labour to complete. The state the were later recovered in showed an odd pattern of burning in the carpets that contrasted with the original textured pattern. This inspired Schlesinger to recreate this accident through carefully burning holes and patterns into similar second hand carpets. This shows how his influences play a big part on the method of his practise because it shows the narrative in his pieces. However, sometimes with too many ideas the pieces can become overworked. For example he explained that he was going to dip the edges in gold or start adding painted layers. This would have ruined the simplicity of the piece. I feel this too as sometimes I feel that I have to add extra elements to a piece if it comes across abstract or minimalist because detail is important to me in my art. However, stepping back and receiving feedback on the work helps to realise that sometimes it can be ruined and to maybe use those ideas on a completely new piece.
He then use this method by burning patterns into rolls of canvas' and then layering the pieces all on one to resemble the Persian rugs that became wanted. However, I feel that these lost the authentic and historic appeal of the rugs and it was trying to appeal too much to a commercial market. This is a worry for me that by selling work or relying on commissions as an income will change my style and practise to conform to the buyers which in the case did for Schlesinger's pieces. I feel that his work overall is very impressive and links well to my own. For his pieces are narrative based but maybe not as design based as my own. They show more of a factual and informative message than the theatrical type i am aiming for. however out of this lecture I did some research into other pieces he has done and there is one where he uses a real human skull and turns it inside out through breaking it into small pieces and forming it again just in reverse. This baffles me as a piece of art, but brought to my attention why is my work on skulls anymore artistic? Id say mine are more installation and prop based where as his are showing the possibilities and queries that people have without knowing until they see his mesmerising pieces.
No comments:
Post a Comment